sirdroseph wrote: 
I'm pretty sure you could swap 'Islam' with the religion of your choice and still be accurate.

Good article, if you are going to criticize Christianity for being patriarchal and in some cases misogynist (oh and it is) then Islam should not get a free ride just because there are Toby Keith redneck Christian bigots that vociferously and obnoxiously spew their ignorance (oh and there are plenty).  We should never lose site that oganized religion is the background and cover of most crimes and persecution against women around the world and yes that means you too Islam:

Reza Aslan is Wrong About Islam and This is Why


From article:

We believe that Islam badly needs to be reformed, and it is only Muslims who can truly make it into a modern religion. But it is the likes of Reza Aslan who act as a deterrent to change by refusing to acknowledge real complications within the scripture and by actively promoting half-truths. Bigotry against Muslims is a real and pressing problem, but one can criticize the Islamic ideology without treating Muslims as themselves problematic or incapable of reform.

There are true Muslim reformists who are willing to call a spade a spade while working for the true betterment of their peoples — but their voices are drowned out by the noise of apologists who are all-too-often aided by the Western left. Those who accept distortions in order to hold on to a comforting dream-world where Islamic fundamentalism is merely an aberration are harming reform by encouraging apologists.

 

What were the original 5 question?

 haresfur wrote: 
I'd happily exchange him for ScottN. Relocate Harpy to the bible belt, where he'll feel right at home.

 RichardPrins wrote: 

 ScottN wrote: 
There are some mouth breathers up here too...

 RichardPrins wrote: 
wtf?  Going to hell in a hand-basket down here. Xenophobic idiots!   Is there room in Canada for one more human, even if I am from the US? I am thinking So. Quebec, kind of "Louise Penny— (mythical) Three Pines" area; or somewhere in the Maritimes.

Godwin's law suppressed...

WildNutDaily columnist Erik Rush, who believes most journalists should be thrown in jail, today demands that the U.S. government crack down on Muslim foreign nationals living in the country following the beheading of a woman in Oklahoma.

In a column titled “Is It Time To Deport, Intern Foreign Muslims?,” Rush claims that all Muslims are either terrorists or terrorist-sympathizers who must be hounded like Japanese-Americans during World War II.

“We deported, expelled and interned foreign nationals and naturalized citizens for a whole lot less during World War II, and I would certainly call for the deportation or expulsion of all Muslim foreign nationals at this juncture,” he writes. (...)

via

Next...

Muslims banned: Arkansas gun range owner declares business 'Muslim-free zone' | News OK

cached

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Did you bring enough for everyone?

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
and a poncho

 haresfur wrote: 
Yay, burritos!

 haresfur wrote: 
I believe sport is a Satanic ploy... Idle hands and all that...

 RichardPrins wrote: 
I believe in a strong separation between Church and Sport so penalize them all.  And, yes that means they should play Australian Rules footy on Good Friday, in spite of the church's objections.

Although if someone wanted to sacrifice a goat after a touchdown... 

Why stop at Isis when we could bomb the whole Muslim world? | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian
Humanitarian arguments, if consistently applied, could be used to flatten the entire Middle East

---

For its part, the NFL said Tuesday morning that Abdullah should not have received a penalty.

NFL spokesman Michael Signora told AP that ''the officiating mechanic in this situation is not to flag a player who goes to the ground as part of religious expression, and as a result, there should have been no penalty on the play.''

 RichardPrins wrote:
There could be something else going on, but I don't think so.  I saw that you agreed about the new rules being relevant (I must have submitted the prior post before seeing your 'P.S.').  It seems as if the NFL is trying to go through some PR 'image rebuild' with a lot of the new rules and/or enforcement, but now find their hands full with a lot of off-field transgressions.

 Proclivities wrote:
Obviously, the writer, of the article I linked to, believes there was something else going on (and implies/suggests the referee was just using an excuse). In that case the added example of Tebow is relevant (whether he still plays or not, isn't). What is relevant and missing from that article, as I agree to below, is that there are new rules ("no sliding").

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
That's too bad. Despite that, his advice about jobs (dirty and otherwise) is good. There are a lot of skilled technical jobs that don't require college AND are in high demand, that is, they pay pretty well. Welders, electricians, plumbers, HVAC, etc. etc.

 cc_rider wrote: 

I actually did see a documentary one time about parade floats, they do put an incredible amount of work into them to be sure.  Perhaps I should have used another analogy like expensive weddings!

 RichardPrins wrote: 
 What are "scare quotes"?  Had the referee known the player was praying, he should/could not have thrown the flag.  The referee threw the flag for "unsportsmanlike conduct, going to the ground", and was apparently unaware that the player was praying.  The article you linked to had (conveniently/deceptively?) altered the headline from the article they cited by removing the ellipsis and question mark.  There is no mention of Tim Tebow in the SB Nation article, and he cannot be penalized for praying because he hasn't played in the NFL for over a year.  Ultimately, the player was not penalized for praying, since "going to the ground" in prayer seems to be allowed.
  Of course, the rule: "Players are prohibited from engaging in any celebrations while on the ground." is a little more than vague.  I guess players can only celebrate while jumping, flying, or levitating.